- Email: [email protected]
Time of Oviposition of Shell-Less Eggs by Turkey Hens Maintained in Cages
1061
RESEARCH NOTES
t
a problem, then egg products containing salt could be packaged and held at a specified temperature, say 50° C , to destroy salmonellae. The conditions of this heat treatment should be such that prevents growth of other microorganisms. REFERENCES Banwart, G. J., 1964. Effect of sodium chloride and storage temperature on the growth of Salmonella oranienburg in egg yolk. Poultry Sci. 43: 974-976. Bergquist, D. H., 1969. Personal communication. Cotterill, O. J., 1968. Equivalent pasteurization temperature to kill salmonellae in liquid egg white at various pH levels. Poultry Sci. 57: 354-365. Cotterill, O. J., and J. Glauert, 1969. Thermal resistance of salmonellae in egg yolk products containing sugar or salt. Poultry Sci. 58: 1156-1166.
TIME OF OVIPOSITION OF SHELL-LESS EGGS BY TURKEY HENS MAINTAINED IN CAGES KARL E. NESTOR, WAYNE L. BACON AND SHERMAN P. TOUCHBURN Department of Poultry Science, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio 44691 (Received for publication January 15, 1972) ABSTRACT The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs by turkey hens housed in individual cages indicates that these eggs are oviposited prematurely. When artificial light was provided from 3:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. the greatest proportion of normal shelled eggs was oviposited in the afternoon. In contrast the greatest frequency of oviposition of shell-less eggs occurred between 4:00 or 5:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M. POULTRY SCIENCE 51: 1061-1063, 1972
Hughes and Parker (1971) observed that chicken hens laid about eighty percent of total shell-less eggs produced between 5:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M. when artificial light was given from 5:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Hewitt (1939) suggested that the cause of shell-less eggs was either a failure of the uterus to function properly or peristaltic contractions becoming so violent as to hurry passage of the egg without allowing time for secretion of the shell. Mather et al. (1962) observed that there were no matrix fibers in shell-less eggs and suggested that these structures
are essential for formation of the shell. The production of shell-less and thinshelled eggs is a problem with turkey hens maintained in cages (Woodward et al., 1961; Nestor and Bacon, 1972). This problem can not be alleviated by feeding additional calcium in the form of oyster shells (Wolford and Zindel, 1970). In order to study the time of oviposition of shell-less eggs in turkeys, the data obtained from two groups of hens utilized in other experiments were analyzed. Both groups were housed in laying cages measuring 39 cm. wide, 61 cm. deep and 61
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
can be destroyed by storing EY containing 10 to 35% salt at 16, 25, and 36°C. Att 16°C, this organism was no longer viablee after 20 to 26 weeks of storage. Salt concentrations had little affect on survival.1 time. However, at higher storage temperatures, survival time was decisively reduced by the higher concentrations off salt. The survival times ranged betweenl 4 to 13 weeks at 25°C. and 1 to 3 weeks at 35°C. Limited mold contamination occurred in the samples stored at 25°C. Results from these contaminated samples5 were not included. S. oranienburg survived frozen storage through 28 weeks at -25°C. If the growth of other organisms is not
1062
RESEARCH NOTES
Eggs were gathered at 8:00 A.M., 10:00 A.M., 12:00 M., 2:00 P.M., 4:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. for the second group of hens. The data were grouped into four groups: (1) 8:00 P.M.-8:00 A.M.; (2) 8:00 A.M.-12:00 M.; (3) 12:00 M.-4:00 P.M.; and (4) 4:00 P.M.-8:00 P.M. This group of hens laid 132 shell-less eggs singly, 96 as "pairs" of shell-less eggs, 18 shell-less eggs laid on the same day as a soft-shelled egg, and 65 on the same day as an apparently normal egg. A greater frequency of normal eggs was laid in the afternoon with both groups of hens (Table 1). Similar results were obtained by Stockton and Asmundson (1950) using natural light and Kosin and Abplanalp (1951), Woodard et al. (1963), and Wolford et al. (1964) providing artificial light from 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., 6:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. and 4:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., respectively. Woodard et al. (1963) observed that 5.5 percent of all eggs were laid during the dark period. The frequency of shell-less eggs laid singly was greater in the first morning collection relative to normal eggs, but
TABLE I.—The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs laid singly or in pairs Shell-Less Eggs Laid: Time of Oviposition
Normal Shells1,2
, , Singly*
c;
Two Shell-Less Per
Day4
5P.M.-8A.M. 8A.M.-12M. 12M.-5P.M.
20.6 29.8 49.1
Group 1 55.2 5.6 39.3
58.9 14.7 18.9
8P.M.-8A.M. 8A.M.-12M. 12M.-4P.M. 4P.M.-8P.M.
17.0 32.3 35.3 15.1
Group 2 40.1 7.9 34.2 17.8
28.8 12.5 12.5 33.3
1 Based on a random sample of 21 and 30 hens, respectively, in Groups 1 and 2. 2 Percent of all normal-shelled eggs. 3 Percent of all shell-less eggs laid singly. 4 Percent of all shell-less eggs laid as two shell-less per day.
less frequent in the other morning collections. The percentages of shell-less eggs laid in the afternoon were similar to those observed for normal eggs. The majority of pairs of shell-less eggs was recorded at the same time (83 of 95 pairs in Group 1 and 34 of 48 in Group 2). Three pairs in Group 1 and one pair in Group 2 had to be discarded from the group allocations because one member of the pair was laid in the morning while the other was laid in the afternoon. The time of oviposition of pairs of shell-less eggs was similar to that of shell-less eggs laid singly except that more of the pairs of shell-less eggs were apparently laid in the first few hours of darkness. The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs indicates that they were laid prematurely and were not a result of failure of the uterus to function properly as was suggested as one possible cause by Hewitt (1939). His second suggestion of oviposition of the egg prior to shell formation as a result of excessive peristaltic contractions seems more likely. Hughes and Parker (1971) observed that 45 percent of shell-less eggs laid by
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
cm. high. Artificial lighting was provided from 3:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Eggs were collected periodically from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. in the first group. For purposes of analysis, they were grouped into three periods: (1) eggs gathered at the first morning collection which represents eggs laid from 5:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M.; (2) eggs gathered after the first morning collection but before noon (8:00 A.M. to 12:00 M.); and (3) eggs gathered in the afternoon from 12:00 M. to 5:00 P.M. There were 270 shell-less eggs laid singly within the 24hour period, 194 shell-less eggs laid as 97 "pairs" within 24 hours, 38 shell-less eggs laid on the same day as a soft-shelled egg, and 57 laid on the same day as an egg with apparently normal shell.
RESEARCH NOTES
REFERENCES Hewitt, E. A., 1939. The physiology of the reproductive system of the fowl. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 95: 201-210. Hughes, B. L., and J. E. Parker, 1971. Time of oviposition of shell-less eggs. Poultry Sci. 50: 15091511.
Kosin, I. L., and H. Abplanalp, 1951. The pattern of egg laying in turkeys. Poultry Sci. 30:168-179. Mather, F. B., G. P. Epling and P. A. Thornton, 1962. The microscopic structure of the egg shell matrix as influenced by shell thickness and environmental temperature. Poultry Sci. 41: 963970. Nestor, K. E., and W. L. Bacon, 1972. Unpublished data. Stockton, K. L., and V. S. Asmundson, 1950. Daily rhythm of egg production in turkeys. Poultry Sci. 29: 477-479. Wolford, J. H., R. K. Ringer and T. H. Coleman, 1964. Lag time, interval between successive eggs and oviposition time in the turkey. Poultry Sci. 43: 612-615. Wolford, J. H., a n d H . C. Zindel, 1970. Caged turkey breeder hens: shell quality versus oyster shell supplementation. Poultry Sci. 49: 814-816. Woodard, A. E., H. Abplanalp and F. X. Ogasawara, 1961. Egg and semen production performance of turkeys under cage management. Poultry Sci. 40: 884-890. Woodard, A. E., W. O. Wilson and F. B. Mather, 1963. The egg-laying rhythm of turkeys in cages. Poultry Sci. 42: 1131-1133.
NEWS AND NOTES (Continued from page 1050) Science Association, August 7 to 11, it seemed appropriate to quote part of this booklet, dealing with paper presentation: "The Matter. Why give a paper? Well, we all know the real reason. What is the ostensible reason? Has anyone heard an earth-shaking discovery communicated to a Society? Aim, therefore, to interest your audience—not to impress them. Incomplete work ('Where do I go from here?') is usually more interesting than completed work. This has been discussed by Bacharach {Analyst, 1954, 79, 530). Relevance of the matter to general principles is more interesting to an audience than its addition to a specialized field. New methods should never be presented by themselves in detail—they are dull to everyone except those using them. The principle of a new method can be of general interest and can be described in five minutes—and that is all it's worth. The Manner. People talk of 'reading a paper' to a Society—and, God help the audience—do just
that. The written language is different from the spoken word. 'Too many papers take the form of an inaudible soliloquy in front of a series of invisible tables'—A member of the Pathological Society. Don't speak to the desk or the slides—neither can hear you nor will the audience if you do. The back of your head may look nicer than your face but the audience are there to hear what you have to say. Speak at someone at the back of the hall. If you must use a blackboard, do so before or after all the slides. Do not put the hall lights on between slides unless there is a long interval (? 2 min.) of unillustrated talk. Jargon appeals to the illiterate, plain English to the wise. Any fool can make things sound complicated, it is a clever speaker whose audience all understand the talk. Make your points as succinctly as possible—if this does not fill the allotted time, so much the better. Never pad it out. ALWAYS rehearse the paper—preferably before
(Continued on page 1066)
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
Delaware chickens were oviposited on the same day as a hard-shelled egg. They observed two hens each of which laid a hard shelled egg which was followed in two to three minutes by a shell-less egg. In Groups 1 and 2 of the present study, 10.2 and 22.1 percent, respectively, of shell-less eggs were oviposited on the same day as a hard-shelled egg. Of these, an average of 40.3 percent were recorded as being laid at the same time. In 16.6 percent of the cases the shell-less eggs were laid first while in 43.1 percent of the cases the shell-less egg was laid after the hardshelled egg.
1063
RESEARCH NOTES
t
a problem, then egg products containing salt could be packaged and held at a specified temperature, say 50° C , to destroy salmonellae. The conditions of this heat treatment should be such that prevents growth of other microorganisms. REFERENCES Banwart, G. J., 1964. Effect of sodium chloride and storage temperature on the growth of Salmonella oranienburg in egg yolk. Poultry Sci. 43: 974-976. Bergquist, D. H., 1969. Personal communication. Cotterill, O. J., 1968. Equivalent pasteurization temperature to kill salmonellae in liquid egg white at various pH levels. Poultry Sci. 57: 354-365. Cotterill, O. J., and J. Glauert, 1969. Thermal resistance of salmonellae in egg yolk products containing sugar or salt. Poultry Sci. 58: 1156-1166.
TIME OF OVIPOSITION OF SHELL-LESS EGGS BY TURKEY HENS MAINTAINED IN CAGES KARL E. NESTOR, WAYNE L. BACON AND SHERMAN P. TOUCHBURN Department of Poultry Science, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio 44691 (Received for publication January 15, 1972) ABSTRACT The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs by turkey hens housed in individual cages indicates that these eggs are oviposited prematurely. When artificial light was provided from 3:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. the greatest proportion of normal shelled eggs was oviposited in the afternoon. In contrast the greatest frequency of oviposition of shell-less eggs occurred between 4:00 or 5:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M. POULTRY SCIENCE 51: 1061-1063, 1972
Hughes and Parker (1971) observed that chicken hens laid about eighty percent of total shell-less eggs produced between 5:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M. when artificial light was given from 5:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Hewitt (1939) suggested that the cause of shell-less eggs was either a failure of the uterus to function properly or peristaltic contractions becoming so violent as to hurry passage of the egg without allowing time for secretion of the shell. Mather et al. (1962) observed that there were no matrix fibers in shell-less eggs and suggested that these structures
are essential for formation of the shell. The production of shell-less and thinshelled eggs is a problem with turkey hens maintained in cages (Woodward et al., 1961; Nestor and Bacon, 1972). This problem can not be alleviated by feeding additional calcium in the form of oyster shells (Wolford and Zindel, 1970). In order to study the time of oviposition of shell-less eggs in turkeys, the data obtained from two groups of hens utilized in other experiments were analyzed. Both groups were housed in laying cages measuring 39 cm. wide, 61 cm. deep and 61
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
can be destroyed by storing EY containing 10 to 35% salt at 16, 25, and 36°C. Att 16°C, this organism was no longer viablee after 20 to 26 weeks of storage. Salt concentrations had little affect on survival.1 time. However, at higher storage temperatures, survival time was decisively reduced by the higher concentrations off salt. The survival times ranged betweenl 4 to 13 weeks at 25°C. and 1 to 3 weeks at 35°C. Limited mold contamination occurred in the samples stored at 25°C. Results from these contaminated samples5 were not included. S. oranienburg survived frozen storage through 28 weeks at -25°C. If the growth of other organisms is not
1062
RESEARCH NOTES
Eggs were gathered at 8:00 A.M., 10:00 A.M., 12:00 M., 2:00 P.M., 4:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. for the second group of hens. The data were grouped into four groups: (1) 8:00 P.M.-8:00 A.M.; (2) 8:00 A.M.-12:00 M.; (3) 12:00 M.-4:00 P.M.; and (4) 4:00 P.M.-8:00 P.M. This group of hens laid 132 shell-less eggs singly, 96 as "pairs" of shell-less eggs, 18 shell-less eggs laid on the same day as a soft-shelled egg, and 65 on the same day as an apparently normal egg. A greater frequency of normal eggs was laid in the afternoon with both groups of hens (Table 1). Similar results were obtained by Stockton and Asmundson (1950) using natural light and Kosin and Abplanalp (1951), Woodard et al. (1963), and Wolford et al. (1964) providing artificial light from 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., 6:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. and 4:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., respectively. Woodard et al. (1963) observed that 5.5 percent of all eggs were laid during the dark period. The frequency of shell-less eggs laid singly was greater in the first morning collection relative to normal eggs, but
TABLE I.—The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs laid singly or in pairs Shell-Less Eggs Laid: Time of Oviposition
Normal Shells1,2
, , Singly*
c;
Two Shell-Less Per
Day4
5P.M.-8A.M. 8A.M.-12M. 12M.-5P.M.
20.6 29.8 49.1
Group 1 55.2 5.6 39.3
58.9 14.7 18.9
8P.M.-8A.M. 8A.M.-12M. 12M.-4P.M. 4P.M.-8P.M.
17.0 32.3 35.3 15.1
Group 2 40.1 7.9 34.2 17.8
28.8 12.5 12.5 33.3
1 Based on a random sample of 21 and 30 hens, respectively, in Groups 1 and 2. 2 Percent of all normal-shelled eggs. 3 Percent of all shell-less eggs laid singly. 4 Percent of all shell-less eggs laid as two shell-less per day.
less frequent in the other morning collections. The percentages of shell-less eggs laid in the afternoon were similar to those observed for normal eggs. The majority of pairs of shell-less eggs was recorded at the same time (83 of 95 pairs in Group 1 and 34 of 48 in Group 2). Three pairs in Group 1 and one pair in Group 2 had to be discarded from the group allocations because one member of the pair was laid in the morning while the other was laid in the afternoon. The time of oviposition of pairs of shell-less eggs was similar to that of shell-less eggs laid singly except that more of the pairs of shell-less eggs were apparently laid in the first few hours of darkness. The time of oviposition of shell-less eggs indicates that they were laid prematurely and were not a result of failure of the uterus to function properly as was suggested as one possible cause by Hewitt (1939). His second suggestion of oviposition of the egg prior to shell formation as a result of excessive peristaltic contractions seems more likely. Hughes and Parker (1971) observed that 45 percent of shell-less eggs laid by
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
cm. high. Artificial lighting was provided from 3:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Eggs were collected periodically from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. in the first group. For purposes of analysis, they were grouped into three periods: (1) eggs gathered at the first morning collection which represents eggs laid from 5:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M.; (2) eggs gathered after the first morning collection but before noon (8:00 A.M. to 12:00 M.); and (3) eggs gathered in the afternoon from 12:00 M. to 5:00 P.M. There were 270 shell-less eggs laid singly within the 24hour period, 194 shell-less eggs laid as 97 "pairs" within 24 hours, 38 shell-less eggs laid on the same day as a soft-shelled egg, and 57 laid on the same day as an egg with apparently normal shell.
RESEARCH NOTES
REFERENCES Hewitt, E. A., 1939. The physiology of the reproductive system of the fowl. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 95: 201-210. Hughes, B. L., and J. E. Parker, 1971. Time of oviposition of shell-less eggs. Poultry Sci. 50: 15091511.
Kosin, I. L., and H. Abplanalp, 1951. The pattern of egg laying in turkeys. Poultry Sci. 30:168-179. Mather, F. B., G. P. Epling and P. A. Thornton, 1962. The microscopic structure of the egg shell matrix as influenced by shell thickness and environmental temperature. Poultry Sci. 41: 963970. Nestor, K. E., and W. L. Bacon, 1972. Unpublished data. Stockton, K. L., and V. S. Asmundson, 1950. Daily rhythm of egg production in turkeys. Poultry Sci. 29: 477-479. Wolford, J. H., R. K. Ringer and T. H. Coleman, 1964. Lag time, interval between successive eggs and oviposition time in the turkey. Poultry Sci. 43: 612-615. Wolford, J. H., a n d H . C. Zindel, 1970. Caged turkey breeder hens: shell quality versus oyster shell supplementation. Poultry Sci. 49: 814-816. Woodard, A. E., H. Abplanalp and F. X. Ogasawara, 1961. Egg and semen production performance of turkeys under cage management. Poultry Sci. 40: 884-890. Woodard, A. E., W. O. Wilson and F. B. Mather, 1963. The egg-laying rhythm of turkeys in cages. Poultry Sci. 42: 1131-1133.
NEWS AND NOTES (Continued from page 1050) Science Association, August 7 to 11, it seemed appropriate to quote part of this booklet, dealing with paper presentation: "The Matter. Why give a paper? Well, we all know the real reason. What is the ostensible reason? Has anyone heard an earth-shaking discovery communicated to a Society? Aim, therefore, to interest your audience—not to impress them. Incomplete work ('Where do I go from here?') is usually more interesting than completed work. This has been discussed by Bacharach {Analyst, 1954, 79, 530). Relevance of the matter to general principles is more interesting to an audience than its addition to a specialized field. New methods should never be presented by themselves in detail—they are dull to everyone except those using them. The principle of a new method can be of general interest and can be described in five minutes—and that is all it's worth. The Manner. People talk of 'reading a paper' to a Society—and, God help the audience—do just
that. The written language is different from the spoken word. 'Too many papers take the form of an inaudible soliloquy in front of a series of invisible tables'—A member of the Pathological Society. Don't speak to the desk or the slides—neither can hear you nor will the audience if you do. The back of your head may look nicer than your face but the audience are there to hear what you have to say. Speak at someone at the back of the hall. If you must use a blackboard, do so before or after all the slides. Do not put the hall lights on between slides unless there is a long interval (? 2 min.) of unillustrated talk. Jargon appeals to the illiterate, plain English to the wise. Any fool can make things sound complicated, it is a clever speaker whose audience all understand the talk. Make your points as succinctly as possible—if this does not fill the allotted time, so much the better. Never pad it out. ALWAYS rehearse the paper—preferably before
(Continued on page 1066)
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at The University of Alberta on March 12, 2015
Delaware chickens were oviposited on the same day as a hard-shelled egg. They observed two hens each of which laid a hard shelled egg which was followed in two to three minutes by a shell-less egg. In Groups 1 and 2 of the present study, 10.2 and 22.1 percent, respectively, of shell-less eggs were oviposited on the same day as a hard-shelled egg. Of these, an average of 40.3 percent were recorded as being laid at the same time. In 16.6 percent of the cases the shell-less eggs were laid first while in 43.1 percent of the cases the shell-less egg was laid after the hardshelled egg.
1063